Publication ethics and malpractice state
JIKO: Jurnal Ilmu Keolahragaan dan Olahraga is a peer-reviewed electronic journal. To that end, explain the ethical behavior of all parties involved in the publication of JIKO articles including authors, editor-in-chief, editorial board, peer-reviewers and publishers (Nahdlatul Ulama University). This statement is based on COPE's Guidelines for Best Practice for Journal Editors. The Editorial Board is responsible, among other things, to decide which research papers / articles should be published in journals and to prevent publication malpractice. Unethical behavior is unacceptable and JIKO does not tolerate plagiarism of any kind.
- Responsibilities of Editors
Publication Decisions: Editors must be responsible for everything published in their journals and must endeavor to meet the needs of readers and writers. The editor's decision to accept or reject a paper for publication should be based on the editorial board's review and the importance of the paper. Review of Manuscripts: Editors must ensure that each manuscript is initially evaluated by the editor, who can use appropriate means, to check the authenticity of the contents of the manuscripts and ensure the quality of the material they publish, recognizing that journals and sections within journals will have different goals and standards. Fair Review: Editors should endeavor to ensure that peer reviews in their journals are fair, unbiased and timely. Editors ensure that any manuscripts received are evaluated on their intellectual content regardless of the author's gender, gender, race, religion, nationality, etc. . Confidentiality: Editors and editorial staff may not disclose any information about manuscripts submitted to anyone other than authors, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisors and appropriate publishers, editors must ensure that information regarding manuscripts submitted by authors is kept confidential. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: Editors should ask reviewers to disclose potential competing interests before agreeing to review submissions.
- Author Responsibilities
Reporting Standards: Authors must present their original research appropriately, and discuss its significance objectively. Manuscripts must be edited in accordance with author guidelines. Authenticity: Authors must certify that their work is entirely unique and original. Redundancy: Authors may not concurrently submit a paper describing essentially the same research. Submitting the same paper to more than one journal is unethical and unacceptable publishing behavior. Source acknowledgment: Authors should know all sources of data used in the study and cite publications that influenced their research. Paper authorship: Authorities should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to understanding, designing, implementing and / or interpreting the proposed study. All persons who have made significant contributions to this study should be listed as co-authors. Related authors must also ensure that all authors and co-authors have viewed and approved the final version of the manuscript and are included as co-authors. Data Access and Retention: Authors must retain raw data associated with the papers they submit, and must make it available for editorial review, upon editor's request. Fundamental errors in published work: When an author discovers significant errors or inaccuracies in a submitted manuscript, the author must immediately notify the editor.
- Responsibilities of Reviewers
Confidentiality: Manuscript reviewers, editors and editorial staff may not disclose any information regarding the submitted manuscript. All manuscripts submitted must be treated as special information. Editors should provide reviewers with guidance on anything that is expected of them including the need to handle submitted material confidentially. Source Recognition: The reviewer must ensure that the author is aware of all sources of data used in the study. Any statements that previously reported observations, derivations, or arguments must be accompanied by a relevant citation. Reviewers should also call the editor's attention to any similarities or overlaps between the manuscript under consideration and other published papers that they are personally aware of. Standard of Objectivity: Review of submitted manuscripts will be carried out objectively. Reviewers must express their views clearly, with supporting arguments. The author's personal criticism is inappropriate.
Promptness / speed: If a reviewer believes it is not possible to review the research reported in the manuscript within the prescribed guidelines, or within the stipulated time, he or she must notify the editor, so that an accurate and timely review can be ensured. Conflicts of Interest: All reviewers must have no conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authors, and / or funding agencies.
- Change or Modification of Published Paper Withdrawal: Published
papers will be withdrawn if the author sees significant errors. Before accepting a withdrawal request, the editorial board and editor-in-chief must
speak to the author sufficiently. If the paper is agreed to be withdrawn, the following will be implemented: Papers in the journal database will be deleted. The link on the online publication site will be removed. Subsequent phrases or similar phrases stating the reason will be displayed under the paper title on the Table of Contents page and journal volume: (This paper was withdrawn due to some technical error). Replacement: Papers published can be replaced if the author submits an updated paper. Before accepting a reimbursement request, the editorial board and editor-in-chief should speak sufficiently with the author, and at least the reviewer should check his progress. If the paper has been approved for replacement, the following will be done: Papers in the journal database will be replaced. The link on the online publication site will be replaced. Subsequent phrases or similar phrases that state the reason will appear under the paper title on the Table of Contents page and journal volume: (This paper was changed because the author submitted the latest version. Contact the editor if you want to check out older versions). The old version has to be saved separately, and if someone wants to check the old version, the editor can send him the PDF. Note that replacement can only be made once, and only for technical progress. Deletion: Published papers will be deleted if reviewers, readers, librarians, publishers, or other subjects see significant errors or plagiarism. Prior to issuing a paper, the editorial board and editor-in-chief should speak to the author adequately, and must allow sufficient time to obtain author explanations. If a paper is agreed to be deleted, the following will be done: Papers in the journal database will be deleted. The link on the online publication site will be removed. Subsequent sentences or similar phrases stating the reason will appear under the paper title on the Table of Contents page and journal volume: (This paper was removed due to plagiarism).
- Double Submission Penalty:
If multiple submissions are found or discovered from other sources, the editorial board must check its status. If multiple submissions are confirmed to be intentional, the review process will be terminated. Reasons should be sent to reviewers, editorial boards and authors. All authors' names will be marked as blacklisted, and this author cannot submit any paper to JIKO for 2 years.